Syrian Civil War: News #8

Calm you were right about the Damascus OP, now I feel bested . Anyways, poor loss of life in Raqqa. A bunch of mothers will be crying for no reason.

sepheronx wrote:Desert Hawks/Falcons seem to be the only real fighting force in Syria, and they are either mercenaries or voluntaries trained by Russia and funded by various groups.  I figure they need to increase their numbers from the 5,000 or so to even more.  Much like how VDV is a massive force in itself, get these guys to be a massive force like the NDF is.  Not necessarily need better equipment but maybe transfer various industries that play around with equipment (T-55's, etc) to convert them like they did before (S-60 on T-55's as example) so that they are better to fighting such insurgency.

Or at least come up with a new training program for the SAA.

More about them.
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-desert-hawks/

They are far from "only real fighting force in Syria", but they are good, as i said before Damascus pockets are surrounded by elite troops.
Some of them are in Deir ez-Zor and that's obvious.

VladimirSahin wrote:Calm you were right about the Damascus OP, now I feel bested . Anyways, poor loss of life in Raqqa. A bunch of mothers will be crying for no reason.

At least they relieve some pressure from Deir Ez-Zor.


Issam Zahereddin even managed to visit Tartus.

Maj. Gen. Issam Zahereddine meets with Governor & #SAA wounded/families during visit to #Tartous wrote:

US deployed a B-52 to back #SDF offensive vs #ISIS in Manbij, E. #Aleppo.

#BreakingNews:
#SDF #YPG entered #Manbij from south western front supported by #USA Air Force, clashing with #ISIS in the city. #Syria

leftovers, Ithriya-Tabqa road...

pictures:

d_taddei2 wrote:there has been a lot various views and who to blame etc for the Raqqa offensive. However it happened and its unlikely another one will be plan anytime soon. I think personally there was no need to go for Raqqa for one there was too much effort needed to get there and being the de-facto capital of ISIS you know this wont be an easy fight.

With the currently situation in Southern Aleppo i think its a wise move to give up on the Raqqa offensive and focus more two fronts the Southern Aleppo front and relieving the presure on troops in Deir ez Zoir. The troop in Deir ez Zoir have done a great job of holding out, but they can't do it for ever. If ISIS collapses in Northern Aleppo you know that they will flee towards Raqqa, Tabqa, and Deir ez Zoir and if they do this will allow them extra bodies to attack Palmyra and Deir ez Zoir creating more havoc and this time the troops in Deir ez Zoir might not be able to hold out.

The Latakia, Northern and North west Hama front isn't going anywhere. As for Damascus even with the progress made still a long way to go, and even if Damascus area was fully back under Government control it wouldnt make any real difference to the conflict if anything there will a deal transfer of rebels from Damascus to other rebel held areas increasing manpower for the rebels. only one positive for the SAA is this frees up troops for other fronts. The main goal in the whole conflict is Aleppo city. It this is fully captured by either side this will more than likely be the death knell for the losing side.

This war won't end by the time Putin dies of old age. Crazy to think about.

More of "Russian betrayed us"...

Oh my god, they're going to try again...

calm wrote:
As I said before, to Damascus.


Sidorenko is back.

Clearing Damascus area could free up lots of forces. As per info there are around 10-15K troops (probably more) to quarantine the pockets inside Damascus region. In addition, almost all the available SyAAF Mi-24s are probably operating in that region. There were only 33 or so Mi-24s in total with the SyAAF, and even if 1/3rd of those numbers were available for operation, it would be good.

If these pockets can be finished off at the earliest the better. But these are concrete jungles and only destruction of those buildings will help clear the areas. These are areas where OFABs need to be used liberally.

It actually doesn't surprise me at all , ISIS using waves of hundreds of suicide bombers
armed with lethal bombs ,and the use of chemical attacks. The only rare thing
for me is why they have not been using such tactics more frequently.

Terrorist tactics are simply very fast mobility like using Motorbikes /suicide bombers and attacking SAA in big waves.. pretty predictable. What i dont understand is why the SAA
was not armed by Russia properly to deal with such massive fast attacks. for such battles
you need also Fast armored vehicles that can keep at distance the terrorist but at the same time hit at them. with high precision weapons to deal with very mobile targets.

Speed ,armor ,and fast skirmish fights is the key to fight ISIS.  you enter an ISIS zones and shell their positions with mobile artillery ,then when their suicide bombers wave start you move away but continue shooting at them . This was the way Mongols empire fought in Asia and conquered all of it with light ,fast mobile armies. they were armed with Bows and Horses. and move to their enemies positions and attack and run ,attack and run , so you always keep the enemy at distance. while hitting them. If Syrian Army have good t-72 tanks with automatic targeting and turret control ,then they will not need to move that much , it will be shooting gallery the waves of suicide bombers. Also Airforce  backup was not there to help them either.
Simply they had a need to airforce backup. specially attack hellicopters. Syrian army mission
was a suicide one ,without air support and tanks with automatic gun targeting, to stop the fast waves of suicide bombers.

Kriva wrote:.............

Assad is kept on a dripper while Russia is beating out as much political capital as it can.

1; keeping Iranians from getting what they are after and that is land route from Iran to Lebanon
2; not enabling SAA to get too much ground back (Sunnis have to have areas they can possibly keep, Kurds have to have area they can keep)

So you either stand up for your ally or GO HOME.!
This war is dragging on for far too long so STOP this agony, go home and let it crumble.

As much as I like Russia this isn't right and you know it.

Wow, had no idea that objective in this war was to create land route from Iran to Lebanon. If only someone told Russians about this little detail before they went in thinking that objective is to kill terrorists.

Care to explain strategic purpose of this land route for those of us who are not familiar with finer points of local geopolitics?

And why would Iran even need that land route now? Soon they will have 100 new Boeing airliners so they can just fly to Lebanon, no problem...

calm wrote:More of "Russian betrayed us"...

When kid in my school don't do their homework they either admit their mistake or at least come up with better excuse than this bullish*t...

Kriva wrote:Just my observation so do not kill me
(very short and to the point)

You either go in and do the job until its finished or DON'T even start it.
(Russia going in for 2-6 months ?? Seriously ?? - not blaming just mutter of fact)

Russia isn't CCCP/ZSSR anymore. Russia is behaving differently, Money and what it can beat out of the situation- not blaming it's just a fact.

4 months all went perfect - BOOM mission finished.
(God knows what Russia GOT for stopping areal campaign - Yes they have received something in return - Russia isn't Non for profit organisation)

Assad is kept on a dripper while Russia is beating out as much political capital as it can.

1; keeping Iranians from getting what they are after and that is land route from Iran to Lebanon
2; not enabling SAA to get too much ground back (Sunnis have to have areas they can possibly keep, Kurds have to have area they can keep)

So you either stand up for your ally or GO HOME.!
This war is dragging on for far too long so STOP this agony, go home and let it crumble.

As much as I like Russia this isn't right and you know it.

+1

Very objective and excellent... but have to diagree on few like Russia not wanting SAA to gain ground. We don't know for real whats happening behind the doors and Russia is not a nation with an unchallenged absolute power which can move freely bulldozing whatever blocks its way. Russia has its own weakness and limitations which need to be taken into account in this war, so path and plans are made by maneuvering and compromising on the way to reach the destination. Thats what most of the idiots don't get.

Kriva wrote:Just my observation so do not kill me
(very short and to the point)

You either go in and do the job until its finished or DON'T even start it.
(Russia going in for 2-6 months ?? Seriously ?? - not blaming just mutter of fact)

Russia isn't CCCP/ZSSR anymore. Russia is behaving differently, Money and what it can beat out of the situation- not blaming it's just a fact.

4 months all went perfect - BOOM mission finished.
(God knows what Russia GOT for stopping areal campaign - Yes they have received something in return - Russia isn't Non for profit organisation)

Assad is kept on a dripper while Russia is beating out as much political capital as it can.

1; keeping Iranians from getting what they are after and that is land route from Iran to Lebanon
2; not enabling SAA to get too much ground back (Sunnis have to have areas they can possibly keep, Kurds have to have area they can keep)

So you either stand up for your ally or GO HOME.!
This war is dragging on for far too long so STOP this agony, go home and let it crumble.

As much as I like Russia this isn't right and you know it.

Compare that to American support to SDF. Day in. Day out. 365 days a year. No break for many years. And that without an airbase in Syria. And that without a port in Syria. The way Russia have in Syria. You got to give it to Americans. They never ditch their allies. They are not picky on aid. What arms has Russia given to SAA and co? Not a single AK-74. Even those T-90s were bought by Iran for SAA and co. What arms has America given to mujahideen in Afghanistan? Stinger missiles. Thousands of those. What arms has America given to rebels in Syria? TOW missiles. Thousands of those. America has proven to be a reliable friend. Russia has not. That's why America has allies all over the world. Hundreds. That's why Russia only had a puny 11 countries that recognized Crimea referendum at the UNGA.

On the contrary, Iran wants lifting siege of Fua and Kefraya. These are Shia towns in Idlib. If SDF can take Manbij, then Shia can take Idlib. Idlib is smaller than Manbij. Idlib is more strategically important than Raqqa. Idlib is Qaeda backed by Turkey. Take Idlib, and the war will quickly end, within weeks.

sepheronx wrote:Dima, Papa is correct.  Original call for the campaign was only supposed to be roughly 3 - 5 months at most.  So they actually stuck to their word, partially.  They still operate in Syria and still bomb, but it isn't part of their obligation to fight Syria's military fight.  Essentially, why should Russia save the country if they cannot save themselves?  Russia has their trained men there, and they unfortunately pulled out first from Raqqa campaign for potential various reasons.  Point is though, Russia cannot simply fight for them, that would actually make them invaders.  Instead, they supply support and the agreements were for Aleppo at the moment.  But what makes it so funny about this, is that many are trying to state that this Raqqa fight was actually Russia's idea, but before this whole thing went to shit in Raqqa, it was mentioned by warisboring that it wasn't in Russias interest for Raqqa but Aleppo.  SyAF has far more assets in their own country than what Russia currently has.  Syria also has modernized Su-24M's to be able to fight in this fight, that are as capable as the ones Russia uses.  So why are they not using those?  They have Su-22's that are dedicated strike aircrafts, so same thing.  Helicopters?  Russian helicopters are based at Hmeymim base is quite a ways away for helicopters to simply fly there.

C'mon I don't expect this from you as I consider you to be generally well read.

As far as I can recall, never was there any official timeframe set for the Russian mission and media was probing what figures to expect and from where to get any kind of "numbers". The "breakthrough" came when an advisor uttered a figure to the media. That was it. If you have seen any official reports regarding the timeframe please do post it. I would correct myself.

Syria asked for Russian's help after fighting a long 4 years war of attrition and Russia obliged. If Syria had the capability, mainly from its airforce to fight this war, they would not have requested for Russia help. Still SyAAF has been conducting airstrikes in their capacity almost every single day for the past 5 years! So any questions related to where is Syrian AF etc etc is illogical, stupid and shows utter lack of intellect and dishonesty with the intend of trolling.

No one is asking for Russian ground troops and thats why mainly only VKS has been active in the Syrian theatre and the VKS-SAA & allies combo did an excellent job untill the pullout. So that kind of coordination and forces are whats needed now, which anyway wasn't very big, but was highly effective.  

Other points I already covered in my other posts and the one I posted earlier as a summary to the operations uptill now. I cant write it all over again, so if you are interested you can go through my responses.

In addition, I repeat once more..... a military deal for Mi-35/28 with Iran would be a win-win situation for all.

KiloGolf wrote:Rojava expansion around Manbij, in less than one month.

As usual good trolling like that Ka-52 loss.

calm wrote:Oh my god, they're going to try again...  

Only fools wind up following a defeat. Others study the defeat, learn from the mistakes and move ahead and try.
Good luck to all of them and RIP to the fallen men.

But whenever be the next move, they need to go in as a completely integrated unit and not without air support. If air support is not available, postpone the offensive.

This is a war of attrition. Jihadists are no Ukrainian soldiers. Ukrainian soldiers don't want to die. Jihadists want to die, for Allah. This war won't be over when Putin kicks the bucket. Buckle up, you are going to enjoy the ride, if you love deaths and killing. The hunt is on.

Why don't Russia give some Kornets or even some Konkurs M to SAA? Those have thermal sight. Set them up during advance. At night, SVBIEDs can be taken down. Islamic State's only advantage is SVBIEDs. Neutralize those, and Raqqa is easy prize.

d_taddei2 wrote:there has been a lot various views and who to blame etc for the Raqqa offensive. However it happened and its unlikely another one will be plan anytime soon. I think personally there was no need to go for Raqqa for one there was too much effort needed to get there and being the de-facto capital of ISIS you know this wont be an easy fight.

With the currently situation in Southern Aleppo i think its a wise move to give up on the Raqqa offensive and focus more two fronts the Southern Aleppo front and relieving the presure on troops in Deir ez Zoir. The troop in Deir ez Zoir have done a great job of holding out, but they can't do it for ever. If ISIS collapses in Northern Aleppo you know that they will flee towards Raqqa, Tabqa, and Deir ez Zoir and if they do this will allow them extra bodies to attack Palmyra and Deir ez Zoir creating more havoc and this time the troops in Deir ez Zoir might not be able to hold out.

The Latakia, Northern and North west Hama front isn't going anywhere. As for Damascus even with the progress made still a long way to go, and even if Damascus area was fully back under Government control it wouldnt make any real difference to the conflict if anything there will a deal transfer of rebels from Damascus to other rebel held areas increasing manpower for the rebels. only one positive for the SAA is this frees up troops for other fronts. The main goal in the whole conflict is Aleppo city. It this is fully captured by either side this will more than likely be the death knell for the losing side.

Agree with you...but we often forget that Aleppo and Idlib was a no-go zone as it was/is under a "ceasefire" agreement with the US. That was probably the main reason why the allied forces planned the Raqqa offensive.
But since long my view and plan has been to venture into the area from the north taking Al Bab, Deir Hafer etc and advance along lake Assad from the north.

Its not that the Syrian forces did not succeed in their effort in that barren desert, they did manage to penetrate upto a closest point of 8Km from their target, before it collapsed due to lack of coordination and support. The staging point (and hence their fall back point!) was Ithyria and there was nothing in between.... From the looks of it, my thought is that they wanted to make another staging point just outside the Tabqa area/Resefa crossroads, for attacking Tabqa and consolidating around the area (two dams/connection to other side - main one north and another smaller one downstream). But before it materialized, the counter-attack succeeded and the forces pulled back to their previous staging/holding area which is Ithriya

Kriva wrote:This might be the disagreement between Russia and Iran.

Iran is after some other things and Russia didn't agree with them so there was no Air support.
(maybe they couldn't provide proper support due to distance or Allepo was a hotter issue)

It doesn't even have to be disagreement. Russia simply did not have enough frames after the ceasefire was announced, which almost coincided with the Iranians and Iraqi's entry for the Aleppo offensive. Without any air cover against well entrenched, organized and supported terrorists they suffered a lot of causalities.

Where is the will there is the way. All in or stay out.

+1
Never give hope if you cannot commit and fulfill that obligation.

SAA needs better recon. Yes they have some drones. But those are civilian recreational ones. Lack night vision. They need military recon drones that have thermal sight, like the Ravens America gave to Ukraine. IS mainly attack at night, so night time recon is a must to beat IS.

IMO, what they need is armed drones. There is not much point in looking at what the enemy is doing without having that instant capability to neutralize them.

Kriva wrote:Agree that Russia has no absolute power, who has(well some nations might think that that they have) ?

Russia doesn't want SAA to get too much ground. Why would you think that isn't the case ?

SAA gaining too much ground can trigger response from TurkISIStan&Sand Kingdoms or USA. (Russia can do fack all about that and would loose that nothing they now have)

SAA gaining too much ground can trigger response from Kurds because they want to establish the country. (Assad would be finished if Kurds will engage SAA- they are willing to fight and die for their cause)

At least that's how I see it.

I mentioned it in terms of Aleppo, Idlib, Raqqa in the north and north east and then the southern areas. Russia will not stop SAA from retaking it, but then Russia cant support all the fronts at the same time at the required intensity with those limited numbers. Kurdish autonomous region is a done one the only remaining thing is how much more SAA can grab in the northern part and how to weed out the rats from nato in those areas.

Even without Russia, Syrian Govt/SAA wont be fighting the Kurds and that has been the case till now. If SAA takes/keeps an area YPG dont attack it and if YPG takes/hold an area, SAA don't attack it. Thats has been the silent understanding all these years. There definitely was small fights in the north east pocket few months back but I think we can take it as isolated incidents which was put down before flaring up higher. Lets not also forget that other than YPG there are other "islamist" also making up the Kurdish militias and who would be eager to pick up a fight with the SAA on behalf of other Jihadist. Kurds are no saints, they also had their dirty hand in Armenian genocide and the early Jihadist from Syria also included Kurds.

What SAA need are not tanks. What SAA need are Kornets. These are ideal for taking down SVBIEDs. If they had 1 such vehicle, they would not have had to retreat.

Video released by CENTCOMArabic of the destruction of a VBIED in Dez. Claimed to be RAF delivered munition, stepping through the video at about 4 secs a black object comes in fast from 8 o'clock.

https://twitter.com/CENTCOMArabic/status/745624962506100736

Instead of bitching at Russia, perhaps some analysis needs to be done. It is clear that the SAA knee-jerked to
Raqqa because the US and the Kurds claimed they would take it over. I have yet to see the US-Kurd thrust to
Raqqa, so it looks like the SAA got baited and good. Hasty offensives have poor chances of success and we have
seen exactly this. Haste makes waste and the hasty appear incompetent. Of course the SAA is not exactly fully
competent to begin with. The selfie army...

Then we have the question why did Russia not provide total air support. This is related to the knee-jerk decision
to scramble for Raqqa. So Russian war planners were not involved in any of the planning and there was not plan
in first place. There seems to have been some reluctant support, which makes sense since Russia is not obliged
to go with whatever idiotic decision the SAA adopts. I am quite sure that the Russian side told the Syrian side that
they were not ready for this assault. The selfie army generals, high on themselves believing that they are the sole
reason for the successes since last fall, probably swore at the Russians in Arabic. Not a pleasant working relationship.
Also, Russia does not have enough air resources in Syria to service every SAA incursion.

Instead of being baited to take over Raqqa, the SAA should focus on Aleppo and clear out the city. It has been
getting consistent Russian air support in this sector and there is an actual war plan involved.